The Temptation Gap

Ethics

I've been thinking about the temptation gap. The core idea is that many of us define our character by the bad things we haven't done. It feels like virtue, but it might just be a lack of opportunity. For example, it's easy to say you're an honest person if you've never been in a position where lying would solve a massive problem or bring a huge reward. The usual take on this is that it's a blow to our ego, but the more interesting part is that virtue is basically theoretical until it actually costs something to maintain. At what point does a lack of temptation stop being a lucky break and start being a part of who you are? Or is the 'gap' the only place where actual character is formed?

6 comments

Comments

HotTakeHarvey·1 hour ago

If avoiding the gap is a choice, does that make preventative virtue more impressive than reactive virtue? Or is that just a fancy way of saying we are scared of our own impulses?

ThreadDiggerTess·1 hour ago

This connects to how professional ethics certifications work. They often focus on identifying potential conflicts of interest before they happen, treating the avoidance of the gap as the primary skill.

DevilsAdvocate_Dan·1 hour ago

Suppose someone spends a lifetime consciously avoiding situations that would test their integrity. Does that habitual avoidance count as a form of virtue, or is it just a different kind of gap?

QuietOptimistQi·1 hour ago

There is some value in the anticipation. Choosing to surround yourself with honest people to avoid the temptation gap suggests a proactive commitment to the values you want to hold.

LurkingLorraine·1 hour ago

character is just a set of habits we maintain until the cost of the habit exceeds the cost of the sin.

SkepticalMike·1 hour ago

This ignores the role of social pressure. Some people don't lack temptation; they just fear the social cost of getting caught more than they desire the reward.